When is free speech not protected?

[excuzzzeme]

I came across an article of continuing (or so it seems to me) litigation by "PetsWarehouse" and many defendants. From what I understand it all started by a bad experience in dealing with them. I think that a $15,000,000 (yes, that is million) is frivolous like that judge with the laundry service over his missing pants. I guess it started somewhere around 2000-20001 time frame.

We all have dealt with a business and not been happy with the service we received at some point. But when is my opinion not protected by the First Amendment? Am I not allowed to state my displeasure on the internet? If it hurts their business is that my problem? Am I not allowed to refer to them by name?

As I understand what I read, that is the point of some of the litigations, plus not knowing who really controls your Domain Name or that control was transfered without the owners knowledge. If that part of the suit is true, I think I would side with the plaintiff, especially if I had a contract with one business only to find out someone else now controls it. I further think posting by people that have not done business with this firm are out of line. I feel it should be limited to those that have been hurt from their experience with this particular company.

So in my scenario, I am the injured party. I bad-mouth a company online and I am liable for suit? Sorry, no way! I am exercising my First Amendment right to exercise freedom of speech.

An article of reference: http://dir.salon.com/story/tech/feature/2002/04/04/aquatic_plants/index.html

I think original posting was 2002.

It sure makes me wonder about doing online business with a firm I have never tried before. Draw your own conclusions.

.

[SchizotypalVamp]

There is a difference between free speech and slander. We can all agree that someone who has had a bad experience with the firm and warns others is not engaging in slander. However, if a company feels as if the account is false or innacurate they can take the people to court for slandering their name. If the person cannot procure evidence, they are forced to retract their statement. I get the impression that this is abused by big companies. I have not done the research to say that with certainty, though.

[crazycanuck]

:perv: soo if this person is "slandering" their name,which i highly doubt,what is 15,000,000 million dollars going to do about it? if someone is lying about somehting like this,and i see no reason why anybody would go out of there way to "slander" a company on the internet,if your going to do something like that,your gonna do it where its seen......
anyways,if someone did actually do that,the company should be able to make them take back the accusation,not make 15 mil off it......

[SchizotypalVamp]

The title of the post is "when is free speech not protected". The answer is, in this case, when it is considered slander. I have no opinion on the case itself.
Money helps fix damages,which is why the court rewards it. Simply taking the accusation back is often not enough. Again, I have no opinion on the case itself.

[Mgamer20o0]

people can sue anyone for anything. i dont like what you said to me i can sue you. the point is if you can win or not. i remember that but i dont know any of the details. i am sure there was something.

why do you think on all those walmart topics petco petsmart or lfs when people are negative bashing what not we try to step in.

yes most companies wont sue over it but there has been problems with others see something then comes in to say something.

here at AC we want a friendly site. yes we can spend all our life crying over how big this or that store is but other then making your self feel a little better it does nothing. really want to effect something put your money where your mouth is. dont go back. better yet.... have a great lfs or saw something great at a store tell people about it. take the time to tell others. if we spent more time talking about the good things going on more things will happen.

[msjinkzd]

really want to effect something put your money where your mouth is. dont go back. better yet.... have a great lfs or saw something great at a store tell people about it. take the time to tell others. if we spent more time talking about the good things going on more things will happen.

I agree 100%, much more valuable to share worthwhile places to go then rehash/bash the known less than ideal places. Don't like an LFS practices, don't shop there for anything.

[Lupin]

:perv: soo if this person is "slandering" their name,which i highly doubt,what is 15,000,000 million dollars going to do about it? if someone is lying about somehting like this,and i see no reason why anybody would go out of there way to "slander" a company on the internet,if your going to do something like that,your gonna do it where its seen......
anyways,if someone did actually do that,the company should be able to make them take back the accusation,not make 15 mil off it......
Good grief...The amount even doubled.:perv: :headshake2: :D

[J double R]

I bad-mouth a company online and I am liable for suit? Sorry, no way! I am exercising my First Amendment right to exercise freedom of speech.


i'm with you on that one.

[Marinemom]

people can sue anyone for anything. i dont like what you said to me i can sue you. the point is if you can win or not. i remember that but i dont know any of the details. i am sure there was something.

why do you think on all those walmart topics petco petsmart or lfs when people are negative bashing what not we try to step in.

yes most companies wont sue over it but there has been problems with others see something then comes in to say something.

here at AC we want a friendly site. yes we can spend all our life crying over how big this or that store is but other then making your self feel a little better it does nothing. really want to effect something put your money where your mouth is. dont go back. better yet.... have a great lfs or saw something great at a store tell people about it. take the time to tell others. if we spent more time talking about the good things going on more things will happen.



I agree 100%.

Marinemom

[excuzzzeme]

I agree that the best approach is to simply not do business with them ever again. Marketing studies have shown that if someone has a bad experience with a company, they will tell 20 people. If they have good experience they will tell no more than 7! I guess that shows we focus on the negative and not the positive.

If I have a bad experience, I simply relate it. I also state the likelihood of not doing business with them again. All in all, I state it as my opinion and recommendation. That is neither slander nor libel. It is simply MO based on experience. When Someone else recommends not doing business and publishes it, then yes, that is going too far if it is not based on personal experience.

[Mgamer20o0]

unless you really know what was said and went on its hard to base one way or the other...... you see the out come but nothing behind on whats going on.

[Coler]

Broadly speaking in the US you're right to express yourself is protected to the extent that you can say what you want about who/want you want, whether true or untrue, in the absence of malice.

Of course, any given e.g. internet community may regulate your right to express yourself in the manner it sees fit, on the basis that the service offered is subject to terms and conditions to which you agree.

[Easydoesit]

when the rules say its not lol

[crazycanuck]

I agree 100%, much more valuable to share worthwhile places to go then rehash/bash the known less than ideal places. Don't like an LFS practices, don't shop there for anything.

i agree with you.. but if you where screwed over by the place,id warn people about it. as well if someone asks if this is a good plce to shop or something like that online or in person, you tell the person about your experience with the stoor ,good or bad. but yes i agree,why go out of your way to tell people of bad stores.tell them of the good ones :)

[crazycanuck]

Good grief...The amount even doubled.:perv: :headshake2: :D

oops :grinyes:

[crazycanuck]

if someone has a bad experience with a company, they will tell 20 people. If they have good experience they will tell no more than 7!


the saying,bad news travels quicker than good :)

[Star_Rider]

interesting.
tho I believe the right to free speech in this case is still protected by the courts and by law.


the difference ..... Civil law.

they are not saying you can't say what's on your mind..but when the opinion or statement can cause damage..they have a course of action in which to recoup some of the damages caused by a statement that is misleading or out right a lie.

if you say something you may be heald liable for those statements..the bad part is..you may be telling the truth and someone is dragging this in court ..possibly trying to get a settlement out of court..as the costs can be staggering.

on the flip side if in civil court you are found..not sladerous..you can then couter for recouping your losses..

UGLY isn't it.

[Coler]

^ Oh I don't know it seems to work out :D£:D€:D$:D

[pleco2009]

your right to say whatever you want is always protected but if you say something that defames or hurts somebody else you can be held accountable for your words

[excuzzzeme]

your right to say whatever you want is always protected but if you say something that defames or hurts somebody else you can be held accountable for your words

Then by that logic - your poor performance as a business caused grief and suffering to the customer and so the customer has the right to sue?

Personally, I think both sides are out of line. I think proof of damage should be required of the plaintiff and recompense should be limited to that amount. I for one do not avoid a business based on a single complaint. There are ppl that will never be happy no matter how much you try to appease them. 22 complaints in 36 months? I don't call that excessive. (Unless there were only 22 sales in those 36 months..........)

[Mgamer20o0]

http://www.expertlaw.com/library/personal_injury/defamation.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation

read this maybe it will help. again your making judgments about the case i think with little to no facts. there has to be more then someone said something someone filed a claim and they own.

[xDetroitMetalx]

I don't really care about the case itself but Freedom of Speech is broken. Take the Westboro Baptist Church for example. These people can say hateful, hurtful, and horrible things and yet they are untouched because they represent a church. Because of this they can do what they do without any consequence? Also if you do act out towards them they video record the whole event to take you to court!

The media is also untouchable. They can slander, bend the truth, and strait up lie! I'm friends with a man and his family where he created a window company from the ground up and destroyed any competition around the area. He worked his whole life to get all three kids to college, build a wonderful home, owns cars, and help his community! He is a nice and generous man. Yet he had to fire an employee because he lost him a huge buisness deal. Well this employee was irate and went to one of those "Problem Solvers" on the news. The "Problem Solver" spent hours infront of there house, flew helicopters over his property, followed his children around going to school, and plain herassed the whole family. They were on the news multiple times and he literally destroyed his life. He took away his buisness and ruined his good name and there was nothing he could do to prevent it nor can he take him to court because the "Problem Solver" is a member of the media.

Things like this make me feel disgraced to be an American.

[SchizotypalVamp]

It's more that there has to be a balance. If you have people who are free to say anything, you end up with a lot of false information which you have to sift through to get to the truth. People exaggerate and lie all the time. That story is horrible, btw. You also end up with a lot of hurt people.
If you don't have freedom of speech then you end up loosing a lot of creativity and advancement in many fields. You also have people who are censored when it comes time to say the truth.

[colinsk]

I just happened across this whole story and found this link:

http://www.citmedialaw.org/threats/novak-v-active-window-productions

It appears that this case has been going on for 7 years! I also found evidence of other lawsuits filed by this person that I would call frivolous. It is a sad commentary on our legal system. Our courts have wasted much time in something that (it seems to me) could be solved in mediation.

Has anyone heard what has happened since the update?



Update:
8/7/2008 - Court ordered that a status conference will be held in Courtroom 820 of the Federal Courthouse in Central Islip on September 5, 2008 at 11:30 a.m

I notice that petsforum's website is down tonight. I have never been there so it could be a server glitch.

[excuzzzeme]

Unfortunately that is something the media appears to be famous for - write a story, get everyone all excited over it and then fail to follow-up. That in effect gives them the last word, regardless of accuracy.